From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <declan.doherty@intel.com>
Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FA5F8E90
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 23 Nov 2015 16:48:48 +0100 (CET)
Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18])
 by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 23 Nov 2015 07:48:26 -0800
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,337,1444719600"; d="scan'208";a="827215968"
Received: from dwdohert-dpdk.ir.intel.com ([163.33.213.167])
 by orsmga001.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 23 Nov 2015 07:48:25 -0800
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
References: <1447176763-19303-1-git-send-email-declan.doherty@intel.com>
 <56530FB1.8000106@6wind.com> <2891112.tEs81Nm6rs@xps13>
 <57931918.3lc4AAkY5P@xps13>
From: Declan Doherty <declan.doherty@intel.com>
Message-ID: <56533514.4080505@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 15:47:32 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <57931918.3lc4AAkY5P@xps13>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 06/10] mbuf_offload: library to support
 attaching offloads to a mbuf
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 15:48:49 -0000

On 23/11/15 14:46, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 2015-11-23 15:17, Thomas Monjalon:
>> Yes, it is a totally new work and it probably needs more time to have a
>> design working well for most of use cases.
>> As I already discussed with Olivier, I think it should be considered as
>> experimental. It means we can try it but do not consider it as a stable
>> API. So the deprecation process would not apply until the experimental
>> flag is removed.
>
> If nobody complains, I'll apply this v7 and will send a patch to add some
> experimental markers.
>
>> For the release 2.2, it would be better to remove the crypto dependency
>> in mbuf. Do you think it is possible?
>
> Sorry, forget it, the dependency is in mbuf_offload.
>

That sounds good to me, thanks Thomas!